The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionThree myths about the church to give up for Lent
by John L Allen Jr on Mar. 02, 2012
I realize this comes a little late, but if anybody's still on the market for something to give up for Lent, I'd suggest that the following misconceptions about the Catholic church and about Christianity in general would be dandy bits of intellectual junk to cut loose in the spirit of the season.
Naturally, the venues where these three myths tend to be most deeply entrenched -- the secular media, the academy, political circles and so on -- are also places where the whole idea of Lenten sacrifice is sometimes a nonstarter. Yet they're remarkably widespread inside the church too, among people who really ought to know better. If Catholics perpetuate these ideas, it's hard to fault the outside world for being seduced by them.
Here are three popular fallacies, in the hope that Lent 2012 might mark the beginning of their expiration date.
1. Purple ecclesiology
"Purple ecclesiology" refers to the notion that the lead actors in the Catholic drama are the clergy, and in fact, the only activity that really counts as "Catholic" at all is that carried out by the church's clerical caste, especially its bishops. You can always spot purple ecclesiology at work when you hear someone say "the church" when what they really mean is "the hierarchy."
(I was once called by a producer from the BBC looking for leads on a segment they wanted to do about women in the Catholic church. I ticked off a series of high-profile Catholic laywomen they could ring up, to which the producer replied: "I'm sorry, I need someone from the church." She meant, of course, someone in a Roman collar -- that's purple ecclesiology at work.)
The truth is that the number of ordained clergy in the Catholic church comes to roughly .04 percent of the total Catholic population of 1.2 billion. If they're the main act, then all one can say is that the Catholic show is wildly top-heavy with supporting cast.
The self-parodying nature of purple ecclesiology was once memorably captured by Cardinal John Henry Newman, who, asked for his opinion on the laity, replied, "Well, we'd look awfully silly without them."
Seeing the church through a purple filter is misleading, even if all we take into view is the visible, institutional dimension of Catholic life. Most Catholic schools, hospitals, social service centers, movements and associations, even chanceries and parish headquarters, are staffed overwhelmingly by laywomen and men. More deeply, however, the church doesn't exist for itself, but to change the world, which means that if its message is to penetrate the various realms of culture -- medicine, law, the academy, politics, the economy and so on -- it's either going to be carried there by laity, or not at all.
Subscribe to NCR
Want to read more about important issues in the life of the Church? A subscription to NCR will keep you up to date and informed.
Abandoning purple ecclesiology enables a wider focus on what the Catholic story of our time actually is. That story is not limited to whatever statement the U.S. bishops have made this week on insurance mandates or the latest Vatican pronouncement on liturgical practice, however important such developments may be. The full Catholic story also includes what hundreds of millions of laywomen and men are doing in their own lives and in their circles of influence, motivated by their faith.
Among other things, a purple ecclesiology leaves one ill-equipped to see creative change taking shape in the church. Even a rudimentary grasp of church history is enough to conclude that such change rarely comes from the top down.
Catholicism developed the mendicant orders, for instance, not because a pope decreed that it should be so, but because creative individuals such as Dominic and Francis saw a new world being born in the great cities of Europe in the 12th and 13th centuries and developed new apostolic models to evangelize it. Catholicism gave birth to the great lay movements of the 20th century, such as L'Arche, Communion and Liberation, Schönstatt and Sant'Egidio, in precisely the same fashion -- bottom-up.
Any take on Catholicism in the 21st century that doesn't include the Focolare along with the bishops, or the Catholic Voices project and the Salt and Light network along with the Vatican, or the great rise of lay ministry in addition to the College of Cardinals, simply isn't seeing the whole picture.
If you don't get that, then you don't really get the church.
2. A church in decline
The popular take on Catholicism these days tends to be that it's a church in crisis. Rocked by sex scandals, bruising political fights and financial shortfalls, it seems to be hemorrhaging members -- a recent Pew Forum study found there are now 22 million ex-Catholics in America, which would be the country's second-largest religious body after what's left of the Catholic church itself -- as well as clustering parishes, closing institutions and struggling to hand on the faith to the next generation.
The overall perception is that this is an era of Catholic entropy -- decline, contraction, things getting smaller.
Seen from global perspective, however, that's just wildly wrong. The last half-century witnessed the greatest period of missionary expansion in the 2,000-year history of Catholicism, fueled by explosive growth in the southern hemisphere. Take sub-Saharan Africa as a case in point: The Catholic population at the dawn of the 20th century was 1.9 million, while by the end of the century it was more than 130 million, representing a staggering growth rate of 6,708 percent. Overall, the global Catholic footprint shot up from 266 million in 1900 to 1.1 billion in 2000, ahead of the overall rate of increase in world population, and is still rising today.
The dominant Catholic narrative of our time, in other words, is not decline but astronomic growth. (That's not true everywhere, as there are significant losses in Europe, parts of North America and in some pockets of Latin America, but it is the global big picture.)
Running those numbers, one is reminded of a famous 2003 essay by David Brooks, poking fun at secular elites who like to believe that religion is in decline: "A great Niagara of religious fervor is cascading down around them," he wrote, "while they stand obtuse and dry in the little cave of their own parochialism."
Even in the United States, the Catholic church is actually holding its own. Yes, it's lost a third of Americans born into the faith, but its retention rate of two-thirds is actually fairly healthy by the competitive standards of America's wide-open religious marketplace. (It's much higher than, say, the Jehovah's Witnesses, who retain only one-third of their members.) Further, the Catholic church is holding steady at roughly a quarter of the national population, thanks largely to Hispanic immigration and higher-than-average birth rates among Hispanic Catholics. In the words of Luis Lugo, director of the Pew Forum, American Catholicism is "browning," but it's not contracting.
To be sure, statistics alone don't settle disputes about the choices facing the church. Those 22 million ex-Catholics in America, for instance, don't necessarily represent a "vote with your feet" referendum against the conservative drift of church leadership in the last quarter-century, especially when you consider that, according to the Pew data, a sizeable chunk defected to Evangelical Protestantism. Nor does the phenomenal growth of Catholicism in the global south necessarily amount to an endorsement of current Vatican policy, because quite honestly, the Vatican has had precious little to do with it.
In other words, you can't draw a straight line from population data to who's right or wrong in current Catholic debates. What can be said with empirical certainty, however, is that anybody who thinks this is an era of Catholic decline needs to get out more often.
3. Christianity is the oppressor, not the oppressed
Of all the popular misconceptions about Catholicism, and about Christianity in general, this is arguably the most pernicious.
Stoked by historical images of the Crusades and the Inquisition, and even by current perceptions of the wealth and power of church leaders and institutions, it's tough for Western observers to wrap their minds around the fact that in a growing number of global hotspots, Christians today are the defenseless oppressed, not the arrogant oppressors.
Here's the stark reality of our times: In the early 21st century, we are witnessing the rise of a whole new generation of Christian martyrs.
Christians are today, statistically speaking, by far the most persecuted religious group on the planet. According to the Frankfurt-based Society for Human Rights, fully 80 percent of all acts of religious discrimination in the world today are directed against Christians. The Pew Forum estimates that Christians experience persecution in a staggering total of 133 nations, fully two-thirds of all the countries on earth.
As part of that picture, the Catholic relief agency "Aid to the Church in Need" estimates that 150,000 Christians die for their faith every year, in locales ranging from the Middle East to Southeast Asia to sub-Saharan Africa and parts of Latin America. This means that every hour of every day, roughly 17 Christians are killed somewhere in the world, either out of hatred for the faith or hatred for the works of charity and justice their faith compels them to perform.
Perhaps the emblematic example is Iraq, where a strong Christian community that took two millennia to build has been gutted in the arc of a little more than two decades. Prior to 1991, the year of the First Gulf War, there were more than 2 million Christians in Iraq, while today the high-end estimate is that somewhere between 250,000 and 400,000 may be left.
Given the special responsibility the United States bears for Iraq, the fact that the fate of Iraqi Christians is not a driving, front-burner priority in American Catholic life is nothing short of a moral outrage.
As the U.S. bishops gear up to fight a new set of church/state battles on the domestic front, the foregoing suggests a special challenge to American Catholics to keep our eyes on the prize. In the States, a threat to religious freedom usually means you might get sued, while in many parts of the world, it means you might get shot. Surely we can all agree that's a more dramatic set of circumstances.
If you give up anything this Lent, the inability to recognize a growing global war on Christians would be a truly inspired choice.
***
In the latest round of the Vatican leaks scandal, an Italian newspaper on Wednesday published two confidential letters documenting a failed 2011 effort by Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican’s powerful Secretary of State, to take control of an important Italian Catholic university and hospital system.
[John L. Allen Jr. is NCR's senior correspondent. His email address is jallen@ncronline.org.]
John, I would also suggest
John, I would also suggest that the Church is "homogeneous" in thought and action. I have always appreciated the thought of James Joyce - "Here comes everybody" when speaking of the Church. We as a church live with different traditions, opinions, ways of life and worshiping, cultures, languages, etc. The Heirarchy at times strive to speak with one voice, but it is a losing battle. We are a church becoming as much as being. The Spirit of creation moves in mysterious ways, but we have always been a Church of life and life is dynamic and evolving within us and around us. The Church is not an institution or corporation although those elements are present with all of the vestiges of royalty; it first the incarnate presence of Jesus both human and diving; it is the people of God gathered not just in worship, but in life, walking with one another, supporting one another and loving one another, (imperfectly to be sure), but the living and resurrected Christ in the world proclaiming the presence of a healing and loving God in all of creation and in each and every person. We are a miracle in the making - and we are all called in our own way to become the body and blood that feeds a wounded and starving world.
Charles, I arise to embrace
Charles, I arise to embrace you, in greatest gratitude for your pertinent reference to our greatest Catholic author, Mr. James Joyce and the immortal sacred scripture which is the prophetic Finnegans Wake.
and for the rest of your cogent comment, necessary, moving and so true.
Have you lost your mind
Have you lost your mind completely Charles? "our greatest Catholic author"????? Joyce is pretty far down the list if we are talking about Catholic authors. Think of Dante, SHakespeare, Cervantes, Tolkien, and about 500 more that put Joyce in his proper place, certainly not our greatest Catholic writer.
Shakespeare? You must be an
Shakespeare? You must be an unfortunate student of Domino Pizza's Joe Pearce . . .
Mr. James Joyce is our greatest modern Catholic author, writing directly and perceptively and profoundly of distinctly Roman Catholic phenomena. I regret you, Homeric Achilles, have been so sadly deceived by your miseducation.
Mr. Joyce turned to Homer and Dante and Roman Catholicism (with passing allusion to Cervantes) in the creation of the greatest novel of all time, Ulysses, as well as his earlier short stories and Portrait.
Where was Tolkein? Creating dwarf wars, far from our Faith . . .
Cervantes his windmills . . .
Catholicism is not an explicit theme for these, as it is constantly for Mr. Joyce. Thus they are not considered Catholic writers, as is Mr. Joyce.
Thank God you wisely omit Lewis (not Carroll but C.S.)!
Joyce was unafraid to speak
Joyce was unafraid to speak truth to power, particularly in Ireland:
“There is no heresy or no philosophy which is so abhorrent to the church as a human being.”
Letter to Augusta Gregory (1902-11-22), from James Joyce by Richard Ellmann (1959) [Oxford University Press, 1983 edition, ISBN 0-195-03381-7] (p. 107)
“I confess that I do not see what good it does to fulminate against the English tyranny while the Roman tyranny occupies the palace of the soul.”
"Ireland, Island of Saints and Sages," lecture, Università Popolare, Trieste (1907-04-27),printed in James Joyce: Occasional, Critical and Political Writing (2002) edited by Kevin Barry [Oxford University Press, 2002, ISBN 0-192-83353-7], p. 125
Joyce: "The actions of men
Joyce: "The actions of men are the best interpreters of their thoughts."
By that standard, it is no "myth," John Allen, that Catholic hierarchs are little more than feudal politicians and "Vagina Ideologues."
Perhaps Mr. Scanlon would be
Perhaps Mr. Scanlon would be interested to know that Professor Tolkien's stories contain much symbolism, and that the symbols that he used point towards the deeper truths of our Faith. The Faith is at the heart of his stories; true, it is not explicit stated, but it was because it was completely absorbed into the story and the theme. Throughout the story of the War of the Ring and Frodo and Sam's journey to Mount Doom, God is always just somewhere close to the surface. We just haven't looked deep enough.
As Professor Tolkien said in his Andrew Lang Lecture 'On Fairy Stories,' "God is the Lord, of Men, of Angels--and of Elves."
Joyce's greatest achievement
Joyce's greatest achievement was Penelope's soliloquy, "Yes." One long 2500 word sentence ending with a punctuation mark at the end: {.} period
I was or used to be a Joycean scholar and read everything about him, and for him.
I have not read or heard that he repented, abjured or retracted his attacks on the Catholic faith and Church. He may be the greatest writer for you and that's about the only satisfaction you will get.
My understanding was that Mr
My understanding was that Mr Joyce left the Church and was more of an atheist. There is some controversy around whether he made peace with it later on in life or not...but during his life, this is quote attributed to him:
"My mind rejects the whole present social order and Christianity -home, the recognised virtues, classes of life, and religious doctrines. […] Six years ago I left the Catholic church, hating it most fervently. I found it impossible for me to remain in it on account of the impulses of my nature. I made secret war upon it when I was a student and declined to accept the positions it offered me. By doing this I made myself a beggar but I retained my pride. Now I make open war upon it by what I write and say and do.[32]"(wikipedia)
But perhaps his respect for the faith was still expressed in his works.
Mr Scanlon . . . Why the
Mr Scanlon . . . Why the derision toward Joseph Pearce? Why the belittling? It's lacking in decorum & respect. Pearce is not the only one to claim significant evidence for Shakespeare's Catholicism. Perhaps you disagree, many do. But, can't the disagreement come without derision? For me, it totally negates your overall point.
And you don't know much about Tolkien if you think the creation of dwarves was far from Catholicism. It'd invite you to read
To bring this back to the topic of this article: It seems to me, you're committing the same errors Mr Allen is suggesting we give up for Lent, especially in his 1st point. If you can't see the universal Catholic Church in the writings of her varied & faithful writers - yes, including Shakespeare, Tolkien, O'Connor, Greene, Cervantes, Joyce, Godden, etc, etc - perhaps you're still having trouble seeing the Church as truly universal?
It's "both/and" & not "either/or." Seems to me it's a much healthier point of view & doesn't necessitate the individual being right all the time.
I rejoice in the Body of Christ & the varied ways we are the hand or the foot or the mouth, etc.
Diversionary Tactics? Is this
Diversionary Tactics?
Is this thread about James Joyce a way to take our minds off of Mr. Allen's conscience-poking reference to Iraqi Christians?
Beautifully put--and John
Beautifully put--and John Allen's most incisive article in a while, and yes, the hierarchy would look "awfully silly" indeed, as they so often do now, when so few Catholics--the praying church--actually are any where near them in thought.
Nancy, I liken the Church to
Nancy, I liken the Church to a body of ringmasters controlling the performing animals in a mom and pop run 19th century Hungarian traveling circus. With the lower clergy resembling carnival gypsies demonstrating their card tricks and other feats of magic designed to separate you from your wallet. In command of seemingly unlimited slights -of- hand.
The pope, not unlike the great P.T. Barnum, trying to get us to buy a ticket-- "this way to see the Egress. . ..50 cents please".
I think he forgot to mention
I think he forgot to mention EWTN. But it's not politically corect to praise nuns who are in full habits, who are faithful to church teaching.
with as little depth in our
with as little depth in our Faith as laundry soap spokesmodels
Oh, I doubt that is was
Oh, I doubt that is was forgotten...it seems the intent was to highlight the aspects of the Church that more closely resemble the loving aspect of Jesus. EWTN has its place (but so does the Council of Trent) but it doesn't quite fit into this particular discussion.
But it's not politically
But it's not politically corect to praise nuns who are in full habits, who are faithful to church teaching.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
From my experience, some of those nuns in full habits were anything but "faithful to church teaching". A habit does not orthodoxy make. Traddy lipstick on the proverbial pig can still leave you with a pig and nothing more.
when we find greater Faith
when we find greater Faith Hope and Charity in the first half alone of Sade's Soldier of Love hymnal, greater spiritual solace in Long Hard Road, a more profound pro-life pronouncement in Babyfather, greater resolution to await the Return in Soldier of Love, in love, than anything we now find in ALL our USCCB, then our bishops become a bourgeois accoutrement we no longer can afford as CHurch. When Sade has more to say about Faith, and more power to instill Faith and HOPE and Love, than anything from Rome since 1979, we need to hear Sade on our iPods at Mass.
I composed this bit of
I composed this bit of bagatelle before ever hearing the immortal Sade Adu hymn By Your Side. Edifying verses for the Holy Communion line.
Oh, hey and another thing I never shared here before. While posing here the question about whether we Democrats are all excommunicated, whether the priest before administering the wafer will demand to examine marriage certificates, voter registration cards and green cards, and whether I must line up in fear and trembling, awaiting rejection, well, anyway, that early morning, just as I should have been awakening and arisnig for another very long and hard and exasperating work day, I suddenly dreamt I was being led upstairs along old stone curving staircases up with carved pillars, like a Solesmes in my youth, and then into a small private chapel with a half dozen other people, all liturgically dressed, and realizing the main celebrant was the present Pope, all through the Mass, as I would once serve in those olden times, and then his leaving with a smile to me.
Did that answer my urgent question? No one else did . . .
I stood up for work, well.
This stuff I am going to pass
This stuff I am going to pass on to otghers. Thank you, John, for the facts.
Yes, the 99.9 percent is the
Yes, the 99.9 percent is the Church, but the .04 percent still drives the bus -- and when they steer it toward a cliff (as they are prone to do way too often these days) they take the rest of us along with them.
Until the drivers learn to listen to the concerned passengers, global Catholicism will remain an unsettling and very hazardous ride. Or (going to John Allen's 2nd point about the Church in decline) they may well find the bus empty after all.
Jesus said when we see these
Jesus said when we see these signs of the times, head for the hills.
Come to the desert, to this place apart, and mourn the great celestial railroad cars upon the precipice, from a desert place of peace.
I couldn't agree more!
I couldn't agree more!
1. Who cares about how big
1. Who cares about how big the Catholic Church is. What I want is somewhere to look for the Truth. In the Catholic Church you have that. What was true in the Ttime of Jesus is true now. It doesn't change its positions on issues depending on what popular culture is doing. Remember, Jesus did not leave us a Bible he left us a church. The Bilble is the story of that church.
2. Most of the complaints about the priest is because they follow church teachings - which can be hard to follow in this secular world we're living in. But it is nice to have somewhere to look to for the truth -- Tthe Catholic Church.
Well, we should bring back
Well, we should bring back slavery, forget women voting, restore the Inquisition and witch-burning. Align the Church with some super-power government and invade countries, forcibly convert people to Catholicism, destroy their cultures, all, of course, to save their souls.
Our Church has not always been right - it has made terrible mistakes. At its heart, the Church understands the message of Jesus - which is that we love God and love one another. But, it is not perfect and it is important that we not act as if it were.
The people of the Church and the hierarchy of the Church need to learn to talk to each other - a conversation that includes a back and forth, a give and take, an exchange. There is too much forced, enforced, ashamed, fearful silence - we need to make noise.
ATF, Your history lessons
ATF,
Your history lessons must come mostly from magazines and TV I supposed. Take slavery - when did the Church officially support chattel slavery?
Among many examples:
Sixty years before Columbus "discovered" the New World, Pope Eugene IV condemned the enslavement of peoples in the newly colonized Canary Islands. His bull Sicut Dudum (1435) rebuked European enslavers and commanded that "all and each of the faithful of each sex, within the space of fifteen days of the publication of these letters in the place where they live, that they restore to their earlier liberty all and each person of either sex who were once residents of [the] Canary Islands . . . who have been made subject to slavery. These people are to be totally and perpetually free and are to be let go without the exaction or reception of any money."
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Eugene04/eugene04sicut.htm
Sigh...lazy thinking is so all over the place!
Amen!
Amen!
Wow. So much purple
Wow. So much purple eclesiology in your comment. It's funny.
May I ask what truth you are
May I ask what truth you are referring to? With all of this cruel mismanagement and cover-ups of the institutional Church, I assume you are referring to the Truth of Jesus Christ, which is, sadly, different from what we find in Rome and many, many diocese throughout the world. What was true in the time of Jesus is not necessarily true now - it depends what you are looking at. The Truth is found in what Jesus did and said and is recorded in the four Gospels. Everyone who is experienced in the workings of the Church knows full well how corrupt and ruinous the organizational Church has been since the beginning, right along with the brightest of spots of Chistendom that shine through the filth the Church has grovelled in.
What do you mean, "Jesus
What do you mean, "Jesus didn't leave us the Bible!" He WAS the Bible, the Living Word of God, who became flesh for the purpose of becoming our Redeemer! He also taught, "The Kingdom of God is WITHIN!" He didn't come to earth to start Church system even more complicated and legalistic than the Jewish System of His day! The Catholic Church has done a great job inventing one Canon Law after another, until today there are literally thousands of them, and furthermore, they haven't been the same "from the beginning of the Church." They are modified (without too much public notice) whenever convenient. Good old Pope Pius XII became famous for his revisions in Canon Law, before becoming Pope. Personally, I think that 99% of the problems in the Catholic Church can be attributed to the Purple Clergy and a Hierarchical system that is more intent with its own survival than in spreading the Gospel of Christ, as revealed IN the Gospels!
This type of thinking is so
This type of thinking is so comfortable for those who think along these lines ; but so ennabling for corruption, self-aggrandizement, greed, fear and other hosts of "sins" to remain in our church and drive people out!!!!!!!!!!!!
Since when is it "Catholic" for priests to take 3-4 European tours each year, drive a $50,000.00 car, live in a 300,000+ home equate to standing up and speaking the "truth". Personally, it makes me so sick!!!!!!!!!!!
What about the poor Nuns who are being betrayed (financially) in their elder years to take the brunt of the "bankruptcies" caused by the sex scandals. Does anyone even know about the plight of these women? does anyone care? How can anyone think that the clergy who are living as people of "entitlement" to all the material comforts are worthy of anything but disgust? Where is the life of Christ being held up for our youth? It seems that there are still too many who are willing to live in "blinders" just to feel that they are"saved", if they just follow the "rules of the priest".
AMEN!
AMEN!
Praise jesus!
Praise jesus!
I think the John Allen's
I think the John Allen's description of the church as being much more than "purple ecclesiology" is absolutely true. I used to ask my students at the Catholic school at which I taught the following question: "Who is the head of the church: A) the pope B) the Archbishop of Canterbury C) the Patriarch of Constantinople D) Jesus Christ. If you get the answer right, then many of the problems we have can disappear. I would argue, as did Jesus, that "in our Father's house, there are many mansions," and those mansions include us all in our various faith paths; we are all on "our way" -- and sometimes that is the way of Jesus Christ, and sometimes it is the way of Abraham, and sometimes it is the way of the Dalai Lama -- but they are all parts of the Way, and we are called to recognize and celebrate the unity within our diversity.
If I look at a painting, do I see the same thing that some else looking at the painting sees -- not exactly; but that does not mean that what I see is the only thing there is to see, nor that what someone else sees is the only thing to see. We can enhance our mutual understanding through listening and respecting our own reactions to that painting.
The problem with "purple ecclesiology" is not the larger church and its almost infinite understanding and working out of its mission; the church is made up of the laity (remember the etymology of "ecclesia" and "liturgy." The problem is that the members of the purple seem to think that the church is "purple ecclesiology," and as John Allen rightly points out, that is a very small percentage of the church. The only ones who seem to be deluded by this understanding of the church are those who wear the purple themselves, and those who are taken in by their rhetoric.
A perfect example: several weeks ago there was an article about priests who took ashes onto the streets on Ash Wednesdays. The "purple ecclesiology" addicts huffed and puffed about devaluing the "sacramental" meaning of the ashes, and in their desire to keep everything with in the church (building), they seem to have forgotten that Jesus very seldom performed any of his healings and acts of love within the confines of an ecclesiastical edifice.
The laity of the church understands all of this much better than the proponents of purple ecclesiology; most of them understand Richard Hooker's point of view - what we believe is not so important as what we do together, and what we do together as members of the church is the true Opus Dei -- loving, taking care of the poor and less fortunate, not judging, being open to the Spirit in her infinite variety of opportunity, brings to fruition the Benedictine goal of "Ora et labora" -- "Until all our work be worship."
"Purple ecclesiology" is indeed a chimera, but as others point out in their comments, those in the purple hold power and want to exercise it, and as Lord Acton so acutely commented more than a century ago: "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."
The managers have been
The managers have been driving recklessly ever since 325 when the emperor Constantine cooped the followers of Jesus at the Council of Nicaea for his political expediency.
Absolutely, gilhow. The
Absolutely, gilhow. The ----truth----- about the 325 AD event ought to be all over the media (and who knows, that day may come) as Jesus never, ever intended for a religion nor church as it has been and continues to be.
Until the drivers learn to
Until the drivers learn to listen to the concerned passengers, global Catholicism will remain an unsettling and very hazardous ride. Or (going to John Allen's 2nd point about the Church in decline) they may well find the bus empty after all.
---------------------------------------------------
No, what the passengers need to do is get off the bus, purchase their own bus company and means of transportation, hire their own drivers, and cart the old buses and the drivers back to the junk yard.
John, - with respect to
John,
- with respect to purple ecclesiology, how many of your reports were dedicated to the hierarchy and how many to the people on the grass route?
- with respect to "church on decline", this seems to be a consequence of secular development, and many analysts fear that if the countries now "booming in Christianity" reach a state of secular development comparable to ours, they may be confronted with the same problems if the hierarchy does not change its attitude:
- the oppression of Christíans today may be a consequence of Christians oppressing others in the past.
Almost totally agree. With
Almost totally agree. With regard to persecution of Christians, it truly is serious in some parts of the world. When Christians talk about being persecuted in the U.S., the nicest thing that can be said it that such concerns are hugely exagerrated.
When anyone suggest the
When anyone suggest the persecution of Christians in the U.S., I think, hmmm...what goes around, comes around.
MORE MYSTICAL BULL .......
MORE MYSTICAL BULL ....... Purple eccesiology is rampant because that is mainly the propaganda that the hierarchs and their publicists and apologists have been feeding Catholics all our lives.
The Church is in serious decline, at least by Jesus' standards, notwithstanding the incessant preaching and docile acceptance of the hierarchy's Rabbit Rule--BREED, BREED, BREED...! Please wake up, John.
Christians are oppressed in some regions, to be sure, and we must do all we can to curtail that. But Catholics are nevertheless very oppressed by their own hierarchy. It is not a zero sum game. Oppression by Catholics by hierarchs and oppression of Christians by outsiders are two separate realities.
For more on this, John, including info relating to cardinals Bevilacqua, Rigali, Dolan, Wuerl, and bishops Chaput and Lori, et al., please read the NCR comment, and related cross-links, under "Vatileaks & Reform Hope? ", readily accessible by clicking on at:
http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/vatican-leaks-scandal-rolls
Please also read the NCR comment, with relevant cross-links, on the new major assessment of the Church's current worldwide position by the distinquished religious sociologist, Rodney Stark, under the heading, "No US State/Church, Amen", readily accessible by clicking on at:
http://ncronline.org/blogs/distinctly-catholic/us-secular-or-christian
I'll just paraphrase
I'll just paraphrase here.
"John do not interrupt my bias' with facts."
PROOF, PLEASE! ...........
PROOF, PLEASE! ........... Anonymous, skip the paraphrasing, please, and show me where there is bias. I am always interesting in learning how to correct my mistakes, even from critics who fail to give their real name. Thank you very much!
Dear Jerry, might I suggest
Dear Jerry, might I suggest that you are in dire need of a proper understanding of the word "oppression." I think you must mean to say that the Catholic Heirarchy does not share your permissiveness and perhaps lack of objective standard. The heirarchy does not get to make it up along the way. You are not oppressed by Church leadership, you would just like them to be more tolerant of abberation, and that my friend is impossible.
ACHILLES' HEEL ...... Please
ACHILLES' HEEL ...... Please talk to the 100,000+ US victims of priest sexual abuse about your shameful denial of bishops' oppression, Achilles. Visit http://catholics4change.com/ and get a flavor of what is really happening in the Church, thank you.
I do not know why knowing
I do not know why knowing somebody's "real name" is such an issue on the message boards of NCR. I find it ironic that next to Jerry Slevin there's a glaring "(not verified)". I mean, does it make any sense to claim that I'm Mitt Obama-Santorum, PhD, JCD, SJ, OP, MDiv, STD only to have it show up as not verified? I, for one, see better use of my energy on those who disagree with me on the substance of their argument or claim rather that if they've posted anonymously or not.
Anonymous: Putting your name
Anonymous:
Putting your name on something is indeed important. If everyone signed their actual names there might be less vitriolic, partisan nonsense. It is worth your energy. It seems we have to ignore all the logical fallacies we learned in logic class when reading some of these anonymous rantings. Marginal note to a ranting: "weak point, shout louder and pound your fist."
You have it sadly reversed.
You have it sadly reversed. It should be, "John do not interrupt my facts with bias!" But you'll have to add that to your list of prayers that would hopefully rise above all the church managers and their non-thinking, blind followers.
The last half-century
The last half-century witnessed the greatest period of missionary expansion in the 2,000-year history of Catholicism, fueled by explosive growth in the southern hemisphere.
===========================================================================
FACTS: Mormonism and Pentecostalism in the southern hemisphere are the fastest growing faiths, even in Brazil the largest Catholic country. The growth rate for Catholicism is practically dead in the water south of the border.
Islam for the first time ever is the largest single faith in the world. Officially replacing the Catholic Church as number one in adherents in 2009.
John, don't forget the Church never reports its losses anywhere. With the accent always on the positive and the camera focusing on prelates and popes, as if THEY were the Church. If it weren't for Mexican, largely illegal immigration to the U.S., the Church in the U.S. would be showing DECLINING membership.
When talking of sub-Saharan Africa, let's not leave out the untold Catholic deaths in recent years in places like Rwanda. Again, no records kept of conversions from Christianity to Islam in Africa.
The Vatican has a propensity to redouble its efforts to seek converts and expand its mission in areas of the world where the poorest and least educated are in super abundance. These poor souls are perfect tools for a manipulative clergy determined to expand their power at the expense of society's weakest and those least prepared to free themselves from the clergy's grip.
If this were not so, we wouldn't be observing the decline of the Catholic Church in the western world on a scale not seen since the 30 Years War in the 17th century. Vatican and USCCB "happy talk" about the Church's future is just another in a long line of hierarchical self-delusion and disconnects from reality. The Church's propaganda machinery is a perpetual motion machine. They fool only themselves.
All from that wonderful gang that gave us the worst scandals involving the continuing sacrilege of priests, bishops, and at least two popes, in a millenium.
I read the article with
I read the article with interest and, against my better judgement, wanted to believe it was right, but I think Jerry's assessment is closer to accurate, unfortunately.
My main objection came when I read about the "oppression of Christians" and the number of Christians killed in Iraq. I was grateful that you mentioned the United States' responsibility in Iraq, but have you any idea how many innocent MUSLIMS we've killed there, starting with sanctions and continuing to today after the invasion and occupation of their country. Unfortunately, having worked with "war"-injured Iraqi children the last several years (all children maimed by us, all who've had famliy and friends killed by us), there is no comparison in number between how many Christians have been killed worldwide in recent times and the number of Muslims killed. We continue to kill innocent people in Afghanistan to this day, and are dropping bombs on men, women and children from that most evil of weapons, the drone, in Pakistan and Yemen in increasing numbers.
And if you don't think we're a "Christian" army, you haven't heard about the thousands of weapons with Bible verses inscribed on the gun sites. Just one article about it here http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/secret-bible-verses-guns-marines-concerned... .
I want to believe that the hierarchy doesn't control the Church, that women have a voice, and that women will one day be able to lead (not as laypeople, but as priests, bishops, Popes); I want to believe that we won't close our eyes to the atrocities that we Christians commit and pretend that we are the victims, not the oppressors.
Jerry, Jerry. What you
Jerry, Jerry. What you cleverly call "the hierarchy's Rabbit Rule" is an anachronism. It has little contemporary impact.
Your invective makes you sound like the Catholic equivalent of Hiroo Onoda. Trust me, you can come out now. It has arguably been decades since the Catholic church, unscathed, walked away from the unreasonable dictates of Humanae Vitae. The primary reasons for the expanding global population of Roman Catholics are only remotely related to H.V., if they are related at all.
John fine article. Your
John fine article. Your article offers a different perspective on how to look at things and that is always welcomed. While I enjoyed your analogy of the rise of the mendicant movements and the secular institutes as the grass-roots church, I wonder with all the technology today if the hierarchical church is more controlling today than in the past, just a thought. Has our modus operandi with technology cut off some grass root movement before they were fully able to take shape?
As for the oppression of Christians you pose an interesting question: Given the special responsibility the United States bears for Iraq, the fact that the fate of Iraqi Christians is not a driving, front-burner priority in American Catholic life is nothing short of a moral outrage. Here is where we have a problem with purple ecclesiology. Since both wars in Iraq were started by republicans (the Bushes) our bishops will speak only in whispers, if at all. If these wars were started by Democrats, they would be flying off the handle as they are about the availability of contraception.
I guess the purple's partisanship has created a grass roots movement- a group of catholic people who pay no heed to what these bishops have to say or teach.
Thanks for this... Purple
Thanks for this...
Purple Ecclesiology
We now know that Catholicism is surviving on the backs of the 99.06 % of Catholics [religious and laity], who perform works of mercy, run hospitals and schools, go to Mass, raise their families and have no say in how the institution runs. Despite the disparity of numbers, sesum fidelum is nonexistent.
Religious sisters like Sister Margaret McBride in Phoenix can run hospitals and administer compassionate, christian care to the many who come for help. People like Sister McBride involve the combined intelligence of doctors and Catholic moralists who agreed it was the moral choice to save the life of a young mother when her unborn child could not be saved. All that is trumped by purple ecclesiology; the bishop rushes in and excommunicates all involved even when his own advisers tell him he is wrong. HMMMM..... So, lay Catholics - do all you like to further the mission of the Church, but if someone in the clergy objects, your own expertise is worthless. Your opinion and acting on your conscience gets you condemned by a member of the .04%. Understanding that I am really in the drivers seat, according to John Allen, makes me FEEL so much better.
A Church in Decline
John Allen mentions that the Church is in decline in the developed west - that is Europe. And it is in decline amongst white persons in the United States. Catholic numbers saw a huge increase in Africa and developing countries. Recent immigrants to the US are boosting the numbers of Catholics and offsetting the sharp decrease in numbers from native defectors here. John Allen referred to a study that points to the "browning" of the church.
There is a quite interesting correlation between the level of education and the rise or fall of Catholic numbers. Perhaps one might say that as a person becomes more affluent and better educated, they become less dependent upon a faith that tries to limit free thought [some of my more conservative acquaintances like to say that they are self-indulgent and don't listen to church teaching precisely because they wish to "misbehave"]. I would disagree. I think it has more to do with a religion that demands strict adherence to a hierarchy that broaches no dissent. Especially from people who have invested a great deal of time and money on educations that promoted asking questions and getting answers. Those of us who have advanced degrees in Catholic Theology find ourselves more suspect than the rest. My guess is that we are the ones who know better when the .04% tries to trot out some erroneous historic detail as a precedent for their pronouncements [like marriage has always been a sacrament or apostolic succession or women were never ordained]. Those of us who are educated in the field know they are wrong.
My guess is that, once those from the developing nations enjoy access to higher education, we may see the decline creeping into these groups as well. As an aside; I certainly would not have devoted my higher education to something I did not have a great love for. I am more in love with Catholicism now than I ever was. My animosity is for the hierarchy who insult my intelligence and refuse to acknowledge that I have a valid perspective even though I don't wear a Roman collar.
Christianity is the Oppressor not the Oppressed
The rise of radical factions in the last century has received great impetus from hatred of the developed west. Many politicians in the United States are very vocal about being a Christian nation; and so we have been. The United States has interfered in the politics of the Middle East by giving preferential treatment to Israel in the form of economic and military aid. Aid that is used to annex land belonging to Palestinians; aid that is used to oppress Palestinians and aid that is used to kill Palestinians when they resist the oppressive policies. We supported dictators like Saddam Hussein; trained his military and gave them weapons of mass destruction [which he destroyed when we told him to]. And when it suited us, we marched into the Middle East for a war that has killed their citizenry in the hundreds of thousands and reduced most of the remaining residents to the status of a third world country. This attack upon the people of the Middle East has had grave consequences for the Christians there; and we, as a mighty christian nation, have to bear some of the responsibility for it.
And our purple ecclesiastics need to speak out more against the first world foreign policy that breeds it.
This is a very "feel good" article. What we all need for Lent is to be realistic. As baptized Catholics, we are committed to the Mission of Jesus. This is OURS! All of ours, and we are obliged to act on it. That means that despite how we feel about the hierarchy, we are still called to see the face of Christ in all we meet. We are obliged to BE CHRIST for all we meet. We cannot abrogate our consciences to the hierarchy. We cannot ignore the plight of the poor as if it is a lesser "life" issue than abortion. We cannot ignore the plight of persecuted christians throughout the world as if it is a lessor "life" issue than abortion. We cannot turn our backs on unprovoked war making by our government as if it is a lesser "life" issue than abortion. We cannot continue to tolerate capital punishment as if it is a lesser "life" issue than abortion.
No matter what the hierarchy does, you do not have permission to check your brain at the door.
The problem with John's first
The problem with John's first point is that he doesn't address the fact that people act as if the Church is really just the laity.
Sensus fidelum refers to unerring truth sensed or recognized by the entire body of the faithful-from the Magisterium to the last of the laity. In other words, if the Magisterium does not agree with the laity, then there is no sensus fidelum. It is not a form of church democracy where the laity can dictate what is to be believed, though this is how many try to present it.
Also, a conscience is not to be simply trusted on its own merits. Otherwise, a rapist with no regret is following their conscience as much as you are when feeding a homeless person. A conscience is to be formed, and to be formed by the Church (yes, including by the hierarchy) whom God has given the authority to bind and loose on earth. To not listen and follow the Magisterium is simply an act of arrogance because you seem to believe God has given you the wisdom to decide every matter of faith and morals on your own.
Finally, abortion is a greater life issue than the others you mentioned. An aborted child has no chance for life or the chance to choose God. A soldier, convict, or homeless person has had those chances.
What people act as if the
What people act as if the church is just the laity? Where is your statistical evidence? Are you pointing to some Pew forum study or perhaps something issued by CARA? If that is the case, please reference it - otherwise it is merely your opinion.
Sensus Fidelum - Quoting from Vatican II document, Lumen Gentium No. 12 - "because of its anointing by the Holy Spirit, the whole body of the faithful possesses a sure sense of the faith."
Dei Verbum no. 8 states that the Holy Spirit enables the apostolic tradition to progress by means of such a lived sense of the faith, in conjunction with two other factors, the work of theologians and the authoritative teaching of the magisterium.
Pope John II, in his Encyclical, Veritas Splendor, spoke of direct revelation by God to every person; it is how all people are aware of Natural Law whether they are baptized Catholics, Hindus or pagans living in an isolated village cut off from civilization. No magisterium is needed for everyone to commonly understand, for instance, that it is not right to do to others what you would not want done to you. You should read the encyclical.
Note, you are the one who said that some people promulgate sensus fidelum as a form of church democracy. That statement was no where to be found in my comment, nor can it be inferred from any comment I made.
In the future, if you want to make a salient and convincing point, it would be best to first read and understand what another person writes. You missed the boat in so many areas:
As for the statement about conscience, I was referring to an informed conscience - no where in my comment did I promote giving rapists and murders a pass because they were rationalizing their behavior [you should really stay away from such extreme examples - it just makes you look silly]. No where in my comment did I say that I disregarded the magisterium [I did however allude to the fact that the magisterium seems to disregard the "anointing by the Holy Spirit" on the whole body of the faithful - the hierarchy acts as though the faithful do not share a common priesthood with them].
Last, but not least, you state that abortion is a greater life issue than all the rest. Scripture disagrees. All humans are created in the image and likeness of God. I, for one, have never read in Genesis that it says that some people will bear less of a likeness to God than others.
Jesus did not make the same kind of distinctions about people in his ministry as you have in your comment. In point of fact, the Gospels relate many instances of Jesus eating with tax collectors and sinners. He hoped to save them through association with them. He found them precious and worthy of saving. As worthy as the unborn.
Unless you claim to have the mind of God, and he has revealed something special to you that he has not even told the magesterium about, then it is just your opinion that abortion is a greater life issue than the rest.
Before you call others arrogant, have a look in the mirror.
I think it has more to do
I think it has more to do with a religion that demands strict adherence to a hierarchy that broaches no dissent. Especially from people who have invested a great deal of time and money on educations that promoted asking questions and getting answers. Those of us who have advanced degrees in Catholic Theology find ourselves more suspect than the rest. My guess is that we are the ones who know better when the .04% tries to trot out some erroneous historic detail as a precedent for their pronouncements [like marriage has always been a sacrament or apostolic succession or women were never ordained]. Those of us who are educated in the field know they are wrong.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Anonymous, The old immigrant Irish clergy of many years ago, when confronted by someone who saw through their flim-flam and priestly hockum designed to keep the more unquestioning sheep under their thumb would call someone like you, "A REBEL", or "IN A STATE OF REBELLION AGAINST HOLY MOTHER THE CHURCH", or God forbid, "A DANGEROUS REBEL WHO QUESTIONS THE FAITH"!!! Ye gads, I'm shocked, shocked I say. LOL LOL
Thanks Jebby, I recall one
Thanks Jebby,
I recall one time being called a heretic by an ultra conservative, cafeteria Catholic. Coming from him, it was a real compliment.
LOL
My comments may be only
My comments may be only marginally related to your excellent & very informed comment. I grew up a contented Catholic & was an altar boy for many years, back in the days of 'Dominus vobiscum...', & through the Second Vatican Council. I remember the era when women were forbidden entry into the sanctuary, & when first allowed; it was nuns changing the altar cloths.I'm no longer involved with church....there used to be three cloths....trivia! But I also remember the issuing of Humane Vitae & it being discussed by our priests.Actually, your reference to a "hierarchy that broaches no dissent"jarred memories of being told that almost all the advisers enlisted by Paul VI recommended a loosening of restrictions on birth control. He apparently thanked them & promptly trashed all their input & gave the world Humanae Vitae.
Today, observing from the sidelines, as it were,I am stunned & disappointed at the attitudes of both clergy & lay people, as revealed by comments on this 'new-fangled' item called....the Internet. (Forgive my sarcasm....On a good day, I can just recall the spelling of 'youth'.)I completely agree with your statements criticizing the excommunication of Sister McBride in Phoenix. On somewhat of a similar note, I've been floored by the innumerable comments in support of the actions taken by the priest in Maryland recently, who refused communion to a lesbian woman at her mother's funeral, & was a no-show at the cemetery; requiring the funeral director to contact an alternate. I have no special learning in the field of Catholic theology, but from my limited knowledge, I would assess his behavior as a "load of crap".The very definition of insensitivity & lack of compassion.
With all the crises that the church is presently dealing with; I've no doubt she will survive this & more. It is reassuring; to say the least, to hear someone as outspoken as yourself. From a personal perspective, I have only fond memories of church life & the eccentricities of my involvement, like being able to read pages of Latin when at the tender age of 10, 11, & up, while not having a clue as to what we(I), was saying. It was fun, &, I must admit; profitable. By that I mean, being proficient in Latin & the more complicated rubrics of the time; meant a bit of extra income when serving weddings or Requiem Masses. Crass, I know; but not only the celebrant got a stipend of sorts...Finally, an opinion.....when choosing 'servus servorum Dei', locked up in the Sistine Chapel following the death of the occupant; they should never have left the Italians. They were a hoot, & apart from Battista, seemed to take it all with a grain of salt.And, perhaps they should have stuck with the old Tridentine Mass.....one last note of trivia: my favorite line from the old Mass was always "Ite, missa est". (Go, the Mass is ended".By that time we were all aching for a cigarette....the priest & senior altar boys. Thanks for your attention...
"Conservative drift" of the
"Conservative drift" of the past quarter century? How about conservative tidal wave? This includes attempting to totally roll back the advances of Vatican II, the systematic purging of moderate and liberal bishops-replacing them with non-thinking, head-nodding, gladhanding, tow-the-mark conservative careerists (see Cardinal Dolan),the persecution of women's religious orders, the hounding of serious and respected theologians, and most pernicious of all, the facilitating and coverup of a worldwide sex abuse scandal. It makes me wonder why the church in the US hasn't been prosecuted under the RICO Act.
This is "religious fervor"? The Catholic Church is "holding its own"?
Mr. Allen, please take off the rose-colored glasses.
"There is a quite interesting
"There is a quite interesting correlation between the level of education and the rise or fall of Catholic numbers. Perhaps one might say that as a person becomes more affluent and better educated, they become less dependent upon a faith that tries to limit free thought [some of my more conservative acquaintances like to say that they are self-indulgent and don't listen to church teaching precisely because they wish to "misbehave"]. I would disagree. I think it has more to do with a religion that demands strict adherence to a hierarchy that broaches no dissent. Especially from people who have invested a great deal of time and money on educations that promoted asking questions and getting answers. Those of us who have advanced degrees in Catholic Theology find ourselves more suspect than the rest."
I agree. Furthermore, those of us with advanced in fields other than theology often find that our knowledge is ignored or treated as suspect, as the priest goes off the rails with his know everything approach. Listening to a priest who clearly the important difference between birth and adult life expectancy spew his theory on why marriage is harder today (it's because couples allegedly live decades longer than in 1900 and therefore the ordeal of marriage last longer.) I really wish I had a button that administer an electric shock to a priest when he says dumb things like this.
I noticed that where I live it has been the fad to put crosses representing aborted fetuses in front of Catholic churches. I don't know why they don't also post the numbers for adoption agencies. Maybe someday a pastor will grow a pair and display crosses representing the troops who died looking for non-existent WMD and Iraqis killed by Bush and Halliburton.
Maybe someday a pastor will
Maybe someday a pastor will grow a pair and display crosses representing the troops who died looking for non-existent WMD and Iraqis killed by Bush and Halliburton.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately, that pastor and others are being vastly outnumbered by the docile and obedient new breed of radical traditionalist young fogies who can't jump through the Uber Pontiff's hoops fast enough in their lace cottas, black capes, and fiddlebacks.
"docile and obedient
"docile and obedient "?????
You don't know the same priests I do, apparently. Around here, we have wonderful, intelligent young men who aren't afraid to preach the Truth from the pulpit, and love God. So what if they love the old mass? It's beautiful and powerful. You can have the spineless preachers of the last generation, those which let people walk all over them. All hail the next generation!
And, might I add, B16 rocks. ROCKS. Like a boss. Vivat The Pope of Christian Unity!
You can have the spineless
You can have the spineless preachers of the last generation, those which let people walk all over them. All hail the next generation!
And, might I add, B16 rocks. ROCKS. Like a boss. Vivat The Pope of Christian Unity!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This sounds more like an advertisement to join the Jungebund or to attend the Nuremberg rally.
Quick, does anyone know the
Quick, does anyone know the name of the bishop of Alabama where Mother Angelica built up her EWTN? Or the Cardinal of India during the life of Mother Theresa? Neither do I!
So what's more important? The title and office or moral authority? I'd suggest moral authority.
But what do we constantly hear about from feminists? That unless they eat of the tree in the center of the garden, they won't be happy? No, that unless they are allowed to become priests (and bishops, and Pope...) they can't be "equal", can't "take their place" in the Church....and yet lo these 2000 years holy women have attained places of moral authority beyond the reach of most of the clergy in their nations.... they didn't need the priesthood, the pomp or the "ex officio" "power" to serve God and the Church.
This being so....why DO feminists insist on ordination as the sine-qua-non of some future "boom" for the Church? Especially when the experience of the Anglicans and Episcopalians show no such boom?
And why the despising of such morally powerful women like Mothers' Angelica and Theresa by the "sisterhood"? It's almost as though service and holiness was not the goal but simply power for its own sake.
Then take a look at the lay movements.... if the Laity are supposed to be so involved...then why, whenever a new lay movement comes along (Opus Dei???) we get long winded accusations against them by the usual suspects...but let a non-Catholic movement "Occupy" come along as we get breathless articles of praise? Again, it's almost as if the only lay involvement called for is revolutionary, overthrow the Church, mobs and not "lets build up the Church" efforts of Knights of Columbus, Focularri, OD and others.
Interesting.
If the moral authority of the
If the moral authority of the church truly resides in the females like Mother Teresa, and not in the male hierarchy; why are you so opposed to letting women have a turn at the helm? Or at least a voice at the helm?
I don't think that all women are clamoring for the priesthood, but those who would should not be denied if they are called by Christ to follow him in that capacity. With all that aside, why aren't you more annoyed that women are shut out from having a voice in the governing of the Church? Why aren't you upset that the hierarchy has systematically re-written the rules so that any committee or agency of influence now excludes women when it once did not? The college of Cardinals, for instance, could have been open to a woman before the rules changed to include only "ordained" men [which it did in 1917].
It is curious that you choose lay movement such as Opus Dei as an example of successful lay movement that Catholics have attacked with "accusations." Have the conservative bunch not done the same thing to Voice of the Faithful?
I submit that the lens through which you perceive this issue is skewed. It ignores the details that don't quite fit with your world view.
Amen
Amen
PRAISE THE LORD!!!!
PRAISE THE LORD!!!!
the moral authority of Mother
the moral authority of Mother Angelica. whoa. Scary.
Morally powerful?
dude . . .
Opus Dei a lay movement?
Mr. Allen has one book on that topic . . .
Michael Walsh another.
But try Robert Hutchison's updated version
dude.
Mother Angelica??
Oh My!!! Such glaring
Oh My!!! Such glaring CLERICALISM!!!
"This being so....why DO
"This being so....why DO feminists insist on ordination as the sine-qua-non of some future "boom" for the Church?"
I'm not entirely sure that the women you refer to DO "insist" on ordination, and certainly not for the reason you stipulate. The women I'm acquainted with who wish they could be ordained in the Roman Catholic Church, and those who ARE ordained in different denominations seek it for pretty much the same reasons men do.
Because they are called.
Post new comment